bruising, bleeding, or paleness. [ phil ] get back to the things that matter most. ask your rheumatologist if enbrel is right for you. [ doctor ] enbrel, the number one biologic medicine prescribed by rheumatologists.

>> cenk: later tonight, we'll see you again at "the young turks."com. until then, "viewpoint" is next. >> john: the g.o.p. is evolving on immigration refororm because it better tested with focus groups. the grieving father of a 6-year-old newtown victim is openly heckled and satan's mignons are now working around the clo clock to prepare the special party room in hel for americans who care more about their toys than the lives of other americans. >> the boy scout of america are open to letting some chapters accept gays while letting others discriminate against gays. they used to be all homophobic.

today is the birthday of univision's cristina saralegui miss oprah winfrey congressman paul ryan and 179 years ago today, president andrew jackson ordered the first use of federal troops to suppress a labor dispute. that should never take anything away from his solid record as a genocidal indian killer. >> john: good evening, i'm john fuglesang. thank you for joins for "viewpoint." is it possible, could both house of congress and the white house actually come together and find a solution to one of our country's most contentious issues? according to president obama in las vegas today the timing couldn't be better. >> obama: the time has come for common sense comprehensive

immigration reform. [ applause ] now is the time. >> john: actually it's way pastime for the 11 million undocumented immigrants already living and working in this country. and way too ahead of its time for tea party republicans who never heard of an undocumented immigrant that they didn't want deported but thanks to the president's overwhelming support from latino voters last november, republicans now seem willing to at least pretend to deal with the issue. as we reported last night a gang of six in the house is work on an immigration bill. one they hope to release before the state of the union address february 12th and a gang of eight in the senate has put forth its principles for immigration reform. principles which president obama said today are very much in line with his own. >> obama: smarter enforcement a pathway to earned citizenship improvements in the legal immigration system so that we continue to be a magnet for the best and the brightest all

around the world. it is pretty straightforward. >> john: straightforward for some but not for all. >> obama: i promise you this, the closer we get, the more emotional this debate is going to become. there are a few things that are more important to us as a society than who gets to come here and call our country home. >> john: by the way ask a cherokee sometime how he feels about who gets to come here. and then there were the conservative ins in texas and arizona and new mexico who have helped block past proposed reforms. arizona senator john mccain, a member of the gang of eight repeated today that before any undocumented immigrants get on a path to citizenship the southern border will have to be secured and that security confirmed. >> we will have a commission made up of the most knowledgeable people including border state governors and other experts who will make recommendations. final decision will be made by the secretary of homeland security. >> john: the president's plan

omits that commission and any effort to tied the citizenship to a vague as yet unnamed border security commission. mr. obama reportedly also wants same-sex couples to benefit from immigration reforms by recognizing them as families in any new law. and guess who thought that was a bad idea. >> the that, to me, is a red flag that frankly we will address in time. we need to get broad consensus over on our proposal to start with and there are a number of very difficult issues we have to resolve. >> john: senator mccain's long-time companion senator lindsey graham liked including same-sex couples even less. senator graham told reporters and i quote "why don't we just put legalized abortion in there and round it all out." >> john: well, that's sane. for more on the about's speech and the future of comprehensive reform, i'm joined by eliseo medina international secretary

treasurer for the service employees international union. he was in attendance for the president's speech today in nevada. good evening. how are you sir? >> i'm doing fine, john. how are you? >> john: terrific. great to have you here. was president obama right? has the time come for immigration reform or are both sides posturing for their voters? >> oh, no, i think it has absolutely come. i think the results of november 6th speak up loud and clear. latinos, immigrants and frankly the american people know that we have to fix this immigration problem. if anything, i think the congress is way behind the voters. the time is now. we gotta get it done. >> john: i think you're right. the president did say his principles were close to the senate's plan and from what's been reported about the house plan that kind of seems comparable as well. sir, is the senate's plan that was announced yesterday sufficient? is there anything you would add to that or more importantly take away?

>> well, you know, is there a lot of conversations that are going to have to be had on the senate's plan. obviously the whole question of border security. i tend to agree with the president, the border is as secure as it's ever been. we don't need to create anymore artificial barriers to legalizing undocumented immigrants and i think that we have to deal with that question. i think that also we have to make sure that when they say a path to citizenship that, in fact, that's what it is. and that we don't wind up with additional hoops that people have to jump through in order to get to citizenship that could delay him for 10, 15 or 20 years. at the end of the day, you know, let's fix it. let's fix it once and for all. let's not create artificial excuses and problems. >> john: let me ask you about one of the hoops that's been included in both plans released so far. the one that would require undocumented workers here in

america to pay a lot of money to get a path to a green card. they would have to pay a penalty and pay back taxes. if we're talking about people working in this country very often for under minimum wage, is there a concern that many of these same immigrants won't have the means to pay these fines? >> well, certainly that's one of the hoops we're really concerned about because if you make it so prohibitively expensive, that's the same thing as denying citizenship. and first of all every immigrant gets the taxes deducted from their paycheck. so it's like people have been paying taxes they have not been able to receive any benefit whatsoever of those taxes. those fine. they should acknowledge that's okay. secondly, if there is going to be a fine, how much is that fine going to be? those are the questions that still need to be resolved. but having said all of this, i think it's very positive, the fact that republicans are finally engaging in this conversation and i hope they do

it from a really good discussion of the merits of immigration reform rather than demonizing immigrants the way they've been doing it in the past. >> john: indeed. undocumented immigrants pay sales tax as well. how would the immigration plans you've seen impact unionized workers and for that matter, nonunion workers across the country. should organized labor support the reforms we've seen so far? >> well, i think that labor is united. we all support legalization and a path to citizenship for undocumented workers. for one very simple reason. we believe that taking these 11 million people and legalizing them and giving them the same rights, the same obligations the same responsibilities as any other american will help lift wages for everybody because they will not be at the mercy of employers who tend to exploit them and because of their

status. so i think that this is a good thing for workers and besides you know i think that anybody that's working here should have the same rights. there should not be anything like a second class american worker in this country. >> john: i agree with you on that one. but let me ask since you were there today for the president's speech do you anticipate any pushback from conservative latinos over the president's reported same-sex marriage proposals as part of this reform bill? >> i don't think so because at the end of the day listen, we are saying everyone should have an opportunity to legalize their status. and if we start saying this one shouldn't and that other one shouldn't, where do you stop? where do you draw the line about who is more or less deserving of legalizing the status? and i think this is not a social issue. this is a question of a policy, public policy for this country. >> john: eliseo medina, labor

organizer and international secretary treasury he were for the service employees international union. sir, what a pleasure. thank you very much for coming on the show tonight. >> thank you john. >> john: now let's expand it a bit. for more on the politics of immigration reform, i'm joined by politico's congressional correspondent, ginger gibson. good evening. >> good evening. thanks for having me. >> john: it is great to have you here. i enjoy reading your work. senator schumer one of the senate's gang of eight says the president is handle thissing issue perfectly. speaker boehner's spokesman however, warned the president not to "drag the debate" to the left because god knows boehner would never drag it to the right. are both leaders here correct where their branch of congress is concerned? >> ties that are binding this gang of eight together are very fragile. both sides acknowledge that it's going to take a lot to get everyone on board republicans and democrats and boehner doesn't want to see the right wing of his caucus pull him too far away and schumer wants to make sure that democrats know the president is in line with their agreement. so what we saw today was a

little bit of cage rattling, coming from both sides. president obama rattling republicans' cages republicans rattling his. but not enough rattling to really hurt those ties that are holding that gang of eight agreement together. at least not yet. >> john: i would guess the overriding concern for these moderate republicans trying to get the reform because it is good for votes, after all is no kind of immigration reform will ever pass the tea party's purity test. is that a reasonable concern they're having? >> you know, we heard a lot of pushback yesterday from the most conservative of the house republican caucus who were very opposed to this path to citizenship. many of those tea party members a couple of others, you know, there's opportunity for consensus and john mccain asked yesterday about whether or not those in the house would oppose it, says he thinks there's majorities in both chambers. acknowledging that some in the house and you know, his own party are going to be opposed to

this. but with democrats and moderate republicans, they think they can get it done. >> john: what do you anticipate coming from the house later this week when they announce their proposal? do you think it will differ sharply from the senate's principles? >> we're going to see eric cantor the majority leader, lay out an immigration proposal. it's going to be rather detailed principled idea from what we understand. it could vary in some ways from the consensus. he declined to comment on that senate agreement. the path to citizenship has been a real sticking point for them. but what's clear that we do know is that this bill's going to move through regular process in the senate. harry reid said he's going to give it a vote in the senate after it comes out of committee. john boehner said they'll work it on the house side. if they can hold the bill together and get it through both chambers republicans and democrats are confident they think they can build some consensus. >> john: the president seems to be flexing a big stick because he said today that he would send his own bill to

congress and insist a vote on it right away if congress can't agree on a bill. could that have been meant as a threat to the g.o.p. house, come up with an immigration bill i can sign or i will keep embarrassing you on this issue and costing you votes? >> this is definitely some cage rattling by the president, telling them look, you've got a deal. you've got something done. now make it happen. he wasn't going to wait months and months and months or years for this to get done. chuck schumer said yesterday that when he spoke to the president, he was -- the urgency was an issue. he wanted to get done now. he made that clear today. you know, don't waste time. don't drag this out. get it done. so it was a little bit of a pushback, a warning you know. you're in a place where you can make this happen. now make it happen. >> john: let me ask you about the president's same-sex marriage proposal as part of this bill. because it seems like a proposal he can always put out and then pull back without suffering much in the way of consequences. sort of like when martin

scorsese put that eyeball in a vice shot in casino because he would fight for it for the r rating. i felt like -- the arcane references. is that an ace in the hole that he can make a concession on down the road? >> this is one of the things that has been cited as a problem for years now. particularly as states start to legalize gay marriage, couples get married but the federal government won't recognize those marriages for immigration purposes. it is an issue that's been very important in the lgbt community. it is one that he could probably walk away from. we have to remember that this is -- you have a lot of other elements particularly the defense of marriage act which would technically prohibit this from potentially prohibit this from happening anyway. so it's one that its base is going to cheer. it is not so clear it is one that can get done in washington. >> john: the supreme court may review doma and eric holder

won't be pursuing doma, it could go any which way. congressional correspondent ginger gibson, thank you so much for joining us tonight. >> thanks for having me. >> john: heckling a grieving father because you're afraid someone might take away your gun even though they never will. have pro-gunned

>> john: we now bring you a new loate. neil his lynn was testifying yesterday about gun control at the legislative office building in connecticut when he posed a rhetorical question about why anyone would need an assault weapon in our society. the same point raised by general stanley mcchrystal. this seemed like a good time for random gun lovers to shout their answers at the grief-stricken parents. >> why anybody in this room needs to have one of these assault-style weapons or

military weapons. not one person can answer that question. >> john: i'm sure that was a member of a well-regulated militia. and more shame comes tomorrow when nra chief executive wayne lapierrre will testify to the judiciary committee that... >> john: no one's tried to blame law-abiding gun owners. i guess that means he believes he's allowed to own anthrax. lapierrre will be testifying during a hearing that will include mark kelly husband to gabrielle giffords who was shot by one of the deranged criminals who had all too easy access to a gun. joining me now is virginia tech shooting survivor, collin goddard. thank you so much for being here this evening. >> thanks for having me. >> john: is this a new low, do

you think attacking the father of a child who was killed at sandy hook? >> there's really no place for anything like this in this discussion or debate. we can be disagreeable. we can disagree without being disagreeable, excuse me. saying things like that reflect poorly on gun owners and men as human beings. >> john: this might be the new m.o. for the hard core pro gun supporters. i'm not talking about the reasonable nra members the majority of whom support the majority of the president's proposed revisions in the laws. but attack the victims and hope they won't speak up. now you've done a lot of work in this field with the brady campaign. have you been the victim of any of the personal attacks? >> unfortunately, i have. i've had a lot of people say why didn't you stab this guy with your pen? why didn't you throw your chair at him? i would have shot him between the eyes, simple as day. i couldn't really believe that. frankly, i've really just tuned that out because like said, there's no place for that in this discussion or this debate. we can do a lot better than

stooping to that level. >> john: i agree. colin, what blows my mind, it is like the nra has instilled this reflex in some of the hard-core gun junkies not talking about the law-abiding gun owners whereas if you mention any kind of popular and reasonable gun-control regulations instantly, they've been conditioned to say you want to take our guns away! you want to punish the good gun owners, things that aren't completely true. how do you deal with that reactive response? >> you really just ignore it and try to speak to the average american gun owner who realizes that background checks aren't going to stop them from owning guns. it has emerged after lapierrre has given the public statements and said this guy doesn't speak for me. we support what you're talking about. so let's keep it going. >> john: are you hearing more and more of that from gun owners? >> we've had a lot of gun owners reach out and even nra members saying this organization doesn't speak for me. they speak for the gun industry and they're joining up with us.

>> john: does this reveal the no holds barred to any sensible reform? >> i think so. unfortunately, they want to have it black and white. they want to make it easily identifiable enemy to gin up their base of supporters. they don't want to talk about the reasonable middle ground that we're all achieving and so it's really unfortunate that they're on display like this. >> john: i think youit this on the head with fund-raising. more and more people are waking up to realize wayne lapierrre and the nra does not represent the interest of gun owners but the interest of gun manufacturers. do you find in your travels and speaking engagements more and more gun owners who realize they've been hoodwinked by this organization? >> absolutely. they realize the things the organization has done and the things they've said that just couldn't be further from reality and then the mainstream of what the average american thinks. they're realizing they're fed up with it. they're coming to us and saying how can we support you as

decent, common gun-owning americans. we're going with it. >> john: in a poll conducted last july by a noted left winger frank luntz 87% of nra members think that preventing gun violence goes hand in hand with supporting the second amendment. so do you think that that's the real hope for any kind of reform, a coalition between responsible gun owners who want sane regulations who realize they don't need weapons designed to kill lots of people in a short amount of time and folks like yourself. >> right. the average gun owner is not the problem. they're part of the solution. we want them to be with the brady campaign. we've seen a lot of elected officials who claim to be gun owners themselves stepping up and saying you know what? these are reasonable solutions i can support that won't stop me from the long tradition of my family of having guns and shooting for sport and self-defense. this is a consensus we'll get a lot of progress with. >> john: you're a school shooting survivor. wayne lapierrre will be speaking to congress tomorrow. he will push his plan to arm

schools. would this have helped at all at virginia tech? >> i think people hear that and they just shake their head. they realize that america's not going to solve our problem of shootings by shooting our way out of it. like i said, i think when he says things like that, it drives even more people to us so go ahead, mr. lapierrre we'll be happy to take a bunch more phone calls tomorrow. >> john: which of the proposals would you like to see enacted? >> really want a comprehensive look at this. there's not just one thing that's going to stop all shootings. we want everything to be on the table here. it was named after james brady. the brady law that created the background check system. unfortunately, they only got that applied to about 60% of gun sales in a given year. we're looking to finish the job that the brady bill started. >> john: press secretary to the president who supported the assault weapons ban 19 years ago. colin, are you frustrated with the early signs of weakness, some democrats like harry reid are showing on this issue? >> no. i'm actually encouraged by

people coming out like senator warner, senator manchin senator casey stepping up and saying we can have a reasonable conversation about the middle ground solutions. when we're talking about should we have more gun control. people speaking to the specifics. when do you that on this issue you see there is an overwhelming majority of support there. people are running with it. we're going to make some progress. >> john: virginia tech shooting survivor working with the brady campaign, colin goddard. thank you for your time and insight this evening. >> thanks, john. >> john: the boy scouts may change their policy on gay scouts. does that mean that merit badges

>> john: we like republicans

here but not always who they vote for. time for an interventions with the g.o.p. as bobby jindal pointed out they're becoming the stupid party. take, if you would republican congressman lou barletta from pennsylvania. after the gang of eight senators announced their immigration reform plan, lou observed... right! because the people who have worked back-breaking jobs for pennys a day to live here are obviously lazy and moochers. because no republican voter ever took advantage of public assistance or social security. because most immigrants are low-skilled, illiterates and they're inherently drawn to the party that promotes marriage equality and women's rights. congressman, i know you have a history of xenophobic fearmongering. a judge ruled your draconian immigration laws were unconstitutional and you appealed it and lost again.

so why do you want to alienate the fastest-growing block of voters in the country and ruin it for the rest of the g.o.p. after mitt romney only got 27% of the hispanic vote? will you please listen to governor bobby? >> we've gotta stop being the stupid party. >> john: or betetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetet

>> john: s six months after reiterating gays and lesbians have no place in the scouts and neff will, the national board might let local scouting groups decide their own policies. only last july, the organization said it would keep barring openly gay people saying

same-sex relations don't mesh with the scouting oath to be "morally straight." that always seemed more like a pun than a reason. but what made the board start rethinking discrimination now? well maybe corporate donors such as intel that have been putting on a lot of pressure or maybe it's the million plus signatures that supported ending the bigoted ban or maybe the scout law itself. which does require scouts to be friendly courteous kind and brave. but is it really brave if the bigotry is still optional? joining me is zach wahls an eagle scout whose speech defending his two moms' right to marry went heroicically viral. he's author of the book "my two moms." it is a pleasure. no big secret, zach, when it comes to gay rights, the boy scouts have been in the wilderness for quite a long time. how important a change is this? can we call this reform when they're still going to allow any

chapters to be as bigoted as they want to be? >> absolutely. reform in the right direction. definitely a step. when the news broke yesterday we were all very excited and tepidly optimistic. we think that this is a step forward as you said, it was just last july that they said there would be no change any time soon. our organization said at that same time, this is what they're going to say literally up until the day they change the policy. we weren't quite right. five days before they ended up change the policy. it has been a long process to get to where we are. even though the discrimination will still be optional if not required at the local level less discrimination broadly speaking is a good thing. >> john: i like how you view it. how could this actually work? would there be different rules in different states or even towns and let's say there was a national meeting or a jamboree, what would happen then? would there be any kind of way to bar certain members from coming in if it was in a homophobic ordained zone? >> sure.

i'm sure they'll be establishing those kind of zones. the way it is going to work at the local level -- it won't necessarily be from town to town. it could be in the same town. each one has a sponsor unit, a charter organization. under this proposed policy change, the charter organizations and sometimes they're churches, civic groups, they're schools. these charter organizations will have the ability to set membership policy. so it seems likely that some charter organizations perhaps the mormon church or the catholic church might continue to prohibit gays and participating but it looks to us that the majority of charter organization civic groups, more mainstream christian nominations will be welcoming gays with open arms because as we've seen at the local level a ban on gay members can be very devastating and you look at all of the reasons there was a change over the last six months, one of the things we were able to do was to amplify the voices of scout leaders using an awesome online tool called change.org to help them gather the million plus signatures you mentioned in the

intro and make the bsa national board understand how big of an impact the ban is having at the local level. >> john: you do get a lot of credit for spearheading the effort with the petition. what do you think really caused the boy scouts to begin to reconsider their policy after only six months? >> yeah, well this goes back to the -- frankly earlier but in 2000, a supreme court case, bsa added the court ruled in the 5-4 decision, they were to discriminate -- continue to discriminate against gay people. what we've seen since then are two things. one, there has been a titanic shift in terms of where lgbt people think the future of this country is going to go. in 2000, it was unsure where marriage equality was going to go, where unemployment on marriage discrimination was going to go. we're moving in a very positive direction if you support lgbt equality. second, like i mentioned earlier, the ability of these online organizing, whether it is change.org social media facebook, twitter, that sort of thing, the ability of scouts all

over the country to connect with each other in a way that frankly, even a decade ago wasn't possible. really changed the game. >> john: boy scouts have historically played a central role in many communities. do you still see that happening? what do kids in 2013 still get from the scouts? >> absolutely. i grew up as a boy scout. i joined the cub scouts when i was like 7. then i was in the program until about 18, graduated out of the program. i had an incredibly enriching experience. my moms took a great length to instill in me good values. those are reinforced. still, in fact, this is -- my best friend is an eagle scout. we live together still. interestingly enough, with another eagle. it is a little idic louse. we have some great experiences. given we live in society that is so focused on technology and being indoors having that opportunity to get outside live outdoors and really have the outdoor experiences invaluable now more than ever. >> john: only about ten

seconds left, once this happens what's the next battle? >> we're look at making sure local councils and regional governing bodies are put in place nondiscrimination policies to encourage charter organizations to do the right ching. >> john: you're a credit to your moms and the scouts. thank you for your service. zach wahl, thank you for the insights. fox news and rush limbaugh single-handedly battle immigration reform. will no one help them? my panel of nonexperts talk all about it next. first, let's check out what's happening on "say anything" with joy behar. >> joy: thanks, john. next on "say anything," we have the two tough talking legal eagles of the hit show staten island law. we'll get their take on the difference between divorce and annulment and what will become of kim kardashian's infamous 72-day marriage. >> he want this dream of getting married again. he really wants her erased from his past. >> is he really religious though? because if you're not really

religious, now you're creating a problem. >> you know why it's not right for mediation? they're not in the right head, either one of them. >> joy: plus comedy legend alan zweibel talks about his experience talking about launching "saturday night live." and my political panel talks about who will enter

>> john: thank you, god for rush limbaugh and our friends at fox news. if it wasn't for them, the tyrant obama would get away with this whole fascist socialist kenyan agenda. when it comes to immigration nothing stands in king obama's way. well almost nothing. >> thanks to obama now you have

amnesty unless you get convicted of a major felony. so i don't know that there's any stopping this. it's up to me and fox news and i think fox news has invested in this. >> john: it is not only immigration reform. they have worked tirelessly to protect us from equal rights for women and marriage equality and any kind of sensible gun control. thank you, rush for protecting us just like the oxy oxycontin flects you from the pain of being who you really are. comedian kevin mccaffrey editor and chief of the editor, tina dupuy and mr. christian finnegan. he says he and fox news are all that stands between obama's agenda and america. the sad question, isn't he kind of right? >> yeah. that's the definition of conservative right? someone who yells no more brown

people. i think that's pretty much -- >> it already sounds like the worst avengers enough of all time. rush and fox news just keeping obama away from america. >> yes. rush and a recent immigrant rupert murdoch are going to keep us all safe from other immigrants. >> john: i hear them accusing obama of amnesty. if you don't like amnesty don't you have to throw out your ronald reagan love doll because he gave real amnesty, not obama. >> let us remember that cubans get automatic amnesty for just arriving on our shores. so again, marco rubio is not actually the best person to do that. >> john: the asylum kind. that's the sacred loophole. is it a good sign that fox and rush are acknowledging they are not just propaganda, they're a legitimate wing of the republican party. >> it is one of those things that everyone knew so much anyway. it is like when lance armstrong comes out. i cheated. we know.

we've known for awhile. but like no one's gone to -- >> a neutral view on this issue. >> george michael's gay? >> i think the g.o.p. is a functioning wing of fox news, you know. the tail is wag the rabid elderly, overweight dog. >> john: david krum came out and said fox news has gone from being a part of the republican party to running the republican party. and doesn't that hurt them? doesn't the does not outrage cycle of fox news serve to image nallize the g.o.p., get off my lawn whippersnapper party? >> it hurts the g.o.p. >> fox only needs two million people to tune in every night. the g.o.p. needs oh, i don't know, half the country to actually vote them into office. so they are at an advantage -- fox news is at an advantage and the g.o.p. is not. >> john: they like to brag that their ratings make them

popular. but then again there's spongebob. fox news is a profit seam for rupert murdoch to make more money. he had to apologize after the sunday times of london ran this cartoon showing israeli prime minister benjamin yet ya you had building a wall trapping the bodies of suffering palestinians. then rupert murdoch tweeted. we love when he does that about the cartoon's artist saying gerald scarfe has never reflected the opinions of the sunday times. nevertheless we owe major apology for grotesque offensive cartoon. so if the u.s., fox and murdoch's empire is -- doesn't this prove that murdoch who held a fund-raiser for hillary clinton who described himself as liberal, has no core ideology beyond making a buck? >> he's procapitallist. >> i love old navy. i love banana republic. they're the same company. he's never represented our

views. well, he's employed by you! >> exactly i can see you not reading someone's entire article so maybe the last paragraph is racy. this is a cartoon. dude, you can see it. it's right there! >> it's not like some ecards, user generated content. some editor has to decide yes let's put this ad in our paper. >> he apologized via tweet which means he means it. for real. >> john: it is really him too. you know, i guess he could apologize by writing me an e-mail. god knows he's probably hacked into it. speaking of people who think they have more power than they really do, shifting gears just a bit. grover norquist, savor it. grover norquist anti-tax pledge is being picked up by a group in italy called tea party italia. is that because that's where fascism began or they saw how well it worked here? >> it sounds like a dance club. >> john: tom hanks is doing the remaining.

>> i want a branch in russia. i think any kind of empire should have a tea party there. >> the italian tea party will be far better dressed. the tricorner hat will be tilted to the side. >> it makes since they would be getting the tea party in europe. our fads go there when we're done with them, you know. they're probably just getting season one of fresh prince now. they're still wearing acid-wash jeans. >> john: neon is going to break any day. it is a good point you know. when you consider the point that like this whole notion of not paying any taxes freedom isn't tree but don't ask me to pay for it. a is that stupid enough to catch on with our european allies? >> my stepsister lives in italy. that country is a mess. i'm not saying -- maybe some sort of counter weight over there might not be a terrible idea. that country is about four years away from being a giant olive

garden. it needs something. >> john: they are the best argument against coalition governments. it is true. third party is like 400 third parties over there. you can live with your mom until you're 50. senator ron johnson in the news after being schooled by hillary clinton in the benghazi hearings gave an interview where he said there were many parallels between ayn rand's novel where society's wealthiest citizens go on strike to protest high taxes and america today. if the wealthiest americans went on strike, who would be affected? the tuxedo industry? the guys who make monocles? what would happen if the wealthiest people decided to do no labor? >> that's what currently is going -- you make the money so you make other people work. >> i love this. we lost allen west. and now we have ron johnson. thank you so much for the intellectual leader of the republican party to finally come forward. >> john: i've interviewed the man. he does make allen west look

like socrates. he's using that as a parallel for the rich being taxed too high. ayn rand published that in 1967 when the rich were taxed at over a 90% rate. it is 39%. what are they whining about? >> i'm surprised he doesn't think this is in the nonfiction section. i think we have to give him credit for knowing this is a parable and not history. >> this is a guy -- he literally bought a statue of atlas because he's so into atlas. he's probably been making comparisons to atlas shrugs for years. >> john: almost naked muscular man. >> any problem that comes up in his life, his olive garden order is wrong this is just like atlas shrugs. >> what is wrong with wisconsin? we have -- like what makes -- all of that cheese make you want to read ayn rand? >> john: there's a lot of good

progressives in wisconsin and they organized last year. i know what you're saying. they did re-elect ron paul to the congress. speak of ron paul -- i mean paul ryan. >> a lot of rones. >> we're talking ayn rand. >> john: what is the ron paul, paul ryan obsession with ayn rand. if ayn rand were alive, she would hate them for their religion and christianity? >> i stliez with people who love ayn rand because i was a college freshman once myself. it is totally a phase. it is hilarious to me to hear people say i'm a fundamentalist christian and i like ayn rand. that's like saying i love reese's cups but i hate chocolate. it is one of the two ingredients. >> john: we'll get a fox news history lesson that will surprise you because (vo) she gets the comedians laughing and the thinkers thinking. >>ok, so there's wiggle room in the ten commandments, that's

what you're saying. (vo) she's joy behar. >>current will let me say anything. what we need are people prepared for the careers of our new economy. by 2025 we could have 20 million jobs without enough college graduates to fill them. that's why at devry university we're teaming up with companies like cisco to help make sure everyone is ready with the know-how we need for a new tomorrow. [ male announcer ] make sure america's ready. make sure you're ready. at devry.edu/knowhow.

♪ ♪

>> john: what's one way fox news helps america? mr. mccaffrey. >> i'm a comedian and writer so they keep me employed. they provide content and help keep me off the unemployment line. >> john: tina? >> someone needs to give gorgeous blond anchorwomen a job. >> christian? >> before the era of fox news, america's eyebrow grooming habits were way out of whack. now we have the waxing techniques of a brian kilmeade. we're in a brow-topia. >> john: as you know, fox news is so powerful, they're able to cover both fictional and nonfictional news with the same journalistic rigger. they also provide us with much-needed lessons in history. after president obama told new

republic this last weekend that fox news exerts pressure on any republican who might ever compromise with them so the government might you know, do stuff, fox news contributor peter the only thing to keep america free. >> the job of fox news is to go after policies and to go after politicians in a constructive way. fox news has the best reporters in america and the best commentators and thinkers in america. if that upsets the president of the united states or the democratic leadership, then so be it. that is the bull work of our democracy. ask thomas jefferson. look at our history. without a free press there's not a free america. without a free fox, there's not a free america. fair and balanced means something, especially in a media that's in the tank. >> john: somebody really wants uncle rupert to give him a

contract. well, i gotta say, thank you peter johnson. not just for having a name that's doubly phallic but for reminding us that america is a freedom loving nation that never got any freedom until october 7 1996 when roger ailes liberty loving network put an end to 220 years of o'reilly free tyranny 1781, bring it up. general george washington defeats cornwallace. in about 215 years, as soon as media monday on laci peterson is get regulated. january, 1863, abraham lincoln signs the emancipation proclamation. telling america's slaves you are finally free. until 1996. 1920 american women win suffrage but continue suffering for another 76 years until